138 PAPERS, ETC. 



We now come to the question — was the leaden cross 

 with its inscription a forgery, aud the search and reputed 

 discovery a pretence ? 



There were very powerful reasons of State wlilch would 

 make Henry the Second at this time especially anxious 

 to be able to bring forward so manifest a proof of King 

 Arthur's death and burial, to convincc the Welsh of tlic 

 vanity of thelr national expectation of his re- appearance to 

 resume the sway of the British tribes. Henry had com- 

 pleted the subjugation of North "Wales, but the people of 

 the South still held out, influenced mainly, among other 

 reasons, by the deeply and universally cherished liope and 

 conviction that Arthur was not dead, but would soon come 

 to restore the kingdom of the Kymri, Henry de Blois, 

 the Abbot of Glastonbui*y at this time, was first cousin to 

 the kiug, being the brother of Stephen. Could there have 

 bccu a coUusion between him and his cousin, and the 

 whole pretended discovery have becn a delusion? That 

 ccrtainly is possible. But is it probable? The Abbot 

 could not well have carried out the scheme without the 

 kuowledge and concurrence of the whole Community. 

 Would it be deemcd safe to confide so important a state 

 sccret to so many witnesses vvho could not be under the 

 control of the court ? 



I do not attach much importancc to the fact of Henry 

 de Blois' near relationship to Stephen, which would make 

 it unlikely he should further the interests of his brother's 

 rival aud successor ; for during his own brother's life we 

 find that the Abbot sided with the supporters of Matilda 

 on the other side on several occasions. It must be remera- 

 bered, however, that the Abbot of Glastonbury was not 

 so dcpendent upon the king that he could be compelled 

 asrainst his will in such a matter. The mitred Abbots of 



J 



